My parents disagreed. A few days later they dragged me to an anti-war protest downtown. As I marched with them, I felt conflicted and confused. The World Trade Center collapsed! A plane flew into the Pentagon! Didn't this merit some sort of military response? And the protest itself wasn't persuasive. While I was never an especially “pro-war” person, I felt alienated when I saw a bunch of disheveled hippies chanting “racist, sexist, anti-gay, US military GO AWAY.”

Entering high school, I started to learn more about the world. As a member of the high school debate team, I was given the topic, “Resolved that: The United States has a moral obligation to mitigate international conflicts.” Researching the topic gave me an opportunity to pursue my interest in international relations and US foreign policy. I stumbled across an extensive list of US military interventions in foreign countries and was shocked to see the sheer number of failures. I began to wonder how the world's most dominant military force could do so much wrong.

Later that year, when Janjaweed militiamen began to tear through Darfur with malice and machetes, I was motivated by my earlier research to follow the crisis. I was intrigued by these questions: What happens when genocide erupts overseas? Military intervention has both failed and succeeded in similar situations, but even if success was guaranteed, would violence really be the right response?

As a high school junior, I wrote an article for The Register-Guard, Eugene's daily newspaper, about foreign aid, particularly its implementation in Sudan. I received a positive response from many community members, among them Beyond War's Executive Director Gayle Landt. When Gayle asked me if I would write for Beyond War, I knew it was an opportunity I wanted to take advantage of.

From my first exposure to the Beyond War philosophy, I've been pleased with its focus for two key reasons. First, an advocacy centered on efforts to move the world beyond violent conflict offers a compelling alternative to the two basic responses to genocide that I had encountered previously. The understanding that tacit consent and military force aren't the only possible courses of action in an international conflict was an important one.

The second part of the Beyond War philosophy that I find especially appealing is the principle that 'we are all one people' and that we each must learn to avoid thinking which is focused on an enemy. Gayle explained that while many liberal organizations mean well, they have an unfortunate tendency to push away people who aren't already behind their cause by engaging in excessive finger pointing and name calling. Immediately, I was reminded of my protest march experience. The US military may indeed be “racist, sexist, and anti-gay,” but to a confused kid, that brazen declaration was intimidating and unpersuasive. Beyond War makes it a policy to avoid such practice. By naming names, but not calling names, I think Beyond War takes a more convincing approach to critiquing militarism.

Next year, I'll be attending Cornell University in Ithaca, New York. There, I'll be able to advance my education and, I hope, my ability to help move the world beyond war.